I'm doing the additional test right now and wow... these questions are face meltingly hard.

Maybe it's just because I've been binge-watching The Office, but Kaplan's practice MBE's feel like when Michael Scott makes everybody go through an overly elaborate and farcical ritual just to do a simple task, and everybody cringes but begrudgingly goes through with it because he signs their paychecks.

lisjjen wrote:I'm doing the additional test right now and wow... these questions are face meltingly hard.

Maybe it's just because I've been binge-watching The Office, but Kaplan's practice MBE's feel like when Michael Scott makes everybody go through an overly elaborate and farcical ritual just to do a simple task, and everybody cringes but begrudgingly goes through with it because he signs their paychecks.

I thought the additional was way harder than the final. A lot more exceptions to rules and weird rules that they didn't lecture about, etc.

lisjjen wrote:I'm doing the additional test right now and wow... these questions are face meltingly hard.

Maybe it's just because I've been binge-watching The Office, but Kaplan's practice MBE's feel like when Michael Scott makes everybody go through an overly elaborate and farcical ritual just to do a simple task, and everybody cringes but begrudgingly goes through with it because he signs their paychecks.

I thought the additional was way harder than the final. A lot more exceptions to rules and weird rules that they didn't lecture about, etc.

There were definitely weird questions on things I had never read about or heard of.

JenDarby wrote: There were definitely weird questions on things I had never read about or heard of.

Yet oddly, I'm doing significantly better than I did on the final. Does this mean I'm improving, or does it just mean I'm doing really well on arcane rules that we aren't going to get tested on?

FWIW, I improved 25 points from the "Final" and have maintained that elevated performance going forth. There's something to be said for familiarity with Kaplan's style of question writing. But, considering my improvement came despite going 3/33 during the 5th hour, I think there has been a bit of learning in the past week.

I keep reminding myself not to get thrown by a different question style. Inevitably there will be a bit of a learning curve next Wednesday.

A mailman watched as the victim and another man engaged in a knife fight. The victim was stabbed and fell to the ground while the other man ran away. The mailman went to the victim, who was unconscious, and took his wallet, his watch, and his wedding ring. Removal of the ring revived the victim enough so that he began to call for help. Seeing a couple approaching on the sidewalk, the mailman slugged the victim with a rock to return him to unconsciousness. The mailman then left with the things he had taken.

But this is:At a bar, a biker deliberately insulted the victim using particularly offensive racial epithets. Provoked into a confrontation, the victim arose, whereupon the biker immediately shoved him into the arms of a confederate, who pretended to help the victim up while removing his wallet. The biker then apologized and blamed his remarks upon intoxication. The biker and the confederate later split the money and credit cards in the victim's wallet.

A mailman watched as the victim and another man engaged in a knife fight. The victim was stabbed and fell to the ground while the other man ran away. The mailman went to the victim, who was unconscious, and took his wallet, his watch, and his wedding ring. Removal of the ring revived the victim enough so that he began to call for help. Seeing a couple approaching on the sidewalk, the mailman slugged the victim with a rock to return him to unconsciousness. The mailman then left with the things he had taken.

But this is:At a bar, a biker deliberately insulted the victim using particularly offensive racial epithets. Provoked into a confrontation, the victim arose, whereupon the biker immediately shoved him into the arms of a confederate, who pretended to help the victim up while removing his wallet. The biker then apologized and blamed his remarks upon intoxication. The biker and the confederate later split the money and credit cards in the victim's wallet.

A mailman watched as the victim and another man engaged in a knife fight. The victim was stabbed and fell to the ground while the other man ran away. The mailman went to the victim, who was unconscious, and took his wallet, his watch, and his wedding ring. Removal of the ring revived the victim enough so that he began to call for help. Seeing a couple approaching on the sidewalk, the mailman slugged the victim with a rock to return him to unconsciousness. The mailman then left with the things he had taken.

But this is:At a bar, a biker deliberately insulted the victim using particularly offensive racial epithets. Provoked into a confrontation, the victim arose, whereupon the biker immediately shoved him into the arms of a confederate, who pretended to help the victim up while removing his wallet. The biker then apologized and blamed his remarks upon intoxication. The biker and the confederate later split the money and credit cards in the victim's wallet.

How confident are people on the breadth of MEE topics? Or better yet, I wonder how little I can know of a couple of topics and not be screwed. For some reason commercial paper is just not clicking for me and it's getting to where I feel like I need to move on and learn estates&wills and conflict of law. 11th hour - yayyy!! (I thought typing that might cheer me up, but it just made me sad.)

A mailman watched as the victim and another man engaged in a knife fight. The victim was stabbed and fell to the ground while the other man ran away. The mailman went to the victim, who was unconscious, and took his wallet, his watch, and his wedding ring. Removal of the ring revived the victim enough so that he began to call for help. Seeing a couple approaching on the sidewalk, the mailman slugged the victim with a rock to return him to unconsciousness. The mailman then left with the things he had taken.

But this is:At a bar, a biker deliberately insulted the victim using particularly offensive racial epithets. Provoked into a confrontation, the victim arose, whereupon the biker immediately shoved him into the arms of a confederate, who pretended to help the victim up while removing his wallet. The biker then apologized and blamed his remarks upon intoxication. The biker and the confederate later split the money and credit cards in the victim's wallet.

I remember being so mad about this one.

Maybe the confederate (get it, Confederate, because he's like, racist) helping the victim up was assault + larceny, whereas the mailman hititing the victim with the rock happened after the larceny.

I didn't get that far because I quit after #72, but yes it would make me mad. But then I would stop being mad when I realized I was very unlikely to see something that absurd on the actual test.

A mailman watched as the victim and another man engaged in a knife fight. The victim was stabbed and fell to the ground while the other man ran away. The mailman went to the victim, who was unconscious, and took his wallet, his watch, and his wedding ring. Removal of the ring revived the victim enough so that he began to call for help. Seeing a couple approaching on the sidewalk, the mailman slugged the victim with a rock to return him to unconsciousness. The mailman then left with the things he had taken.

But this is:At a bar, a biker deliberately insulted the victim using particularly offensive racial epithets. Provoked into a confrontation, the victim arose, whereupon the biker immediately shoved him into the arms of a confederate, who pretended to help the victim up while removing his wallet. The biker then apologized and blamed his remarks upon intoxication. The biker and the confederate later split the money and credit cards in the victim's wallet.

I remember being so mad about this one.

LOL yea I picked the mailman who punched the dude.

HA! I just got that one too, and also got it wrong. I swear the questions are getting more incomprehensible and/or subjective.

A mailman watched as the victim and another man engaged in a knife fight. The victim was stabbed and fell to the ground while the other man ran away. The mailman went to the victim, who was unconscious, and took his wallet, his watch, and his wedding ring. Removal of the ring revived the victim enough so that he began to call for help. Seeing a couple approaching on the sidewalk, the mailman slugged the victim with a rock to return him to unconsciousness. The mailman then left with the things he had taken.

But this is:At a bar, a biker deliberately insulted the victim using particularly offensive racial epithets. Provoked into a confrontation, the victim arose, whereupon the biker immediately shoved him into the arms of a confederate, who pretended to help the victim up while removing his wallet. The biker then apologized and blamed his remarks upon intoxication. The biker and the confederate later split the money and credit cards in the victim's wallet.

I remember being so mad about this one.

Maybe the confederate (get it, Confederate, because he's like, racist) helping the victim up was assault + larceny, whereas the mailman hititing the victim with the rock happened after the larceny.

I didn't get that far because I quit after #72, but yes it would make me mad. But then I would stop being mad when I realized I was very unlikely to see something that absurd on the actual test.

Also, if it is on the test, lots of people will be getting it wrong, not just us.

Yeah that one was testing on the definition of robbery where the taking has to be at the same time as the force/threat but you kind of have to shut off your instincts for common sense before answering some of these, especially the ones that are like entire paragraph crim law answers.

There were a lot of wtf moments on the additional MBE, I quit after the first 25. I swear there were a few that they would give the right answer and then the answer I chose would almost be explained as being correct, but at the end it would say "therefore, this is incorrect."

I am freaking out over essays now. I'm not sure how close to the model answers I need to be to pass them, but I'm not getting that close to them, or I'm arguing different points when the model answer goes in a totally different direction. I also feel like these are touching a lot of material that was never covered in our lecture or even on the outlines provided.

I mean, I just did a corporations problem where the model answer said that even though a corporation had no money for creditors, employees or day to day operations and was living off personal loans from one person, it was not undercapitalized. THAT IS the definition of undercapitalization. I quit.

ahduke99 wrote:There were a lot of wtf moments on the additional MBE, I quit after the first 25. I swear there were a few that they would give the right answer and then the answer I chose would almost be explained as being correct, but at the end it would say "therefore, this is incorrect."

I am freaking out over essays now. I'm not sure how close to the model answers I need to be to pass them, but I'm not getting that close to them, or I'm arguing different points when the model answer goes in a totally different direction. I also feel like these are touching a lot of material that was never covered in our lecture or even on the outlines provided.

I mean, I just did a corporations problem where the model answer said that even though a corporation had no money for creditors, employees or day to day operations and was living off personal loans from one person, it was not undercapitalized. THAT IS the definition of undercapitalization. I quit.

sounds like the corporation was a euphemism for law school ( no money living off loans...)

ahduke99 wrote:There were a lot of wtf moments on the additional MBE, I quit after the first 25. I swear there were a few that they would give the right answer and then the answer I chose would almost be explained as being correct, but at the end it would say "therefore, this is incorrect."

I am freaking out over essays now. I'm not sure how close to the model answers I need to be to pass them, but I'm not getting that close to them, or I'm arguing different points when the model answer goes in a totally different direction. I also feel like these are touching a lot of material that was never covered in our lecture or even on the outlines provided.

I mean, I just did a corporations problem where the model answer said that even though a corporation had no money for creditors, employees or day to day operations and was living off personal loans from one person, it was not undercapitalized. THAT IS the definition of undercapitalization. I quit.

Luckily on an essay you could argue that it was undercapitalized and still get lots or all of the points. It's not like MBE where a weird answer you disagree with is just wrong and that's that. That being said, these essays are freaking me out so bad it's not even funny.

ugh I'm definitely at the point where I can state most of the general rules for the MEE topics but like 85% of the essays I've looked at are like "well that's great but unfortunately I'm testing you on this one sentence on page 1,356 of the outline about an exception to the majority rule and wow would you look at that, turns out you won't be getting any points here after all!" not here for this, bar exam, not here for this at all

Grenadine wrote:ugh I'm definitely at the point where I can state most of the general rules for the MEE topics but like 85% of the essays I've looked at are like "well that's great but unfortunately I'm testing you on this one sentence on page 1,356 of the outline about an exception to the majority rule and wow would you look at that, turns out you won't be getting any points here after all!" not here for this, bar exam, not here for this at all

Drives me crazy. I always feel like I know enough to answer an essay question, and then it feels like the practice question is asking me the one damn thing I don't know.